Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: July 24, 2025, 10:12 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Theoretical physics shows "irreducible complexity" arguments invalid.
#8
Theoretical physics shows "irreducible complexity" arguments invalid.
(May 4, 2014 at 4:46 pm)Heywood Wrote:
(May 4, 2014 at 4:35 pm)Rampant.A.I. Wrote: Which ones? Why do theists throw out statements like this without supporting them? Claims about "The eye being irreducibly complex" have been debunked decades ago, and theists still try to convince people they are.

The genome of Mycoplasma Laboratorium contains water marks that were designed by intellects which are of sufficient complexity that it would be unreasonable to ever think they evolved sans intellect.

The water marks contained in the genome of Mycoplasma Laboratorium are as follows:

Quote:watermark 1 an Html script which reads to a browser as text congratulating the decoder with an email link ([email protected]) to click to prove the decoding.

watermark 2 contains a list of authors and a quote from James Joyce: "To live to err, to fall, to triumph, to recreate life out of life".

watermark 3 contains more authors and a quote from Robert Oppenheimer (uncredited): "See things not as they are, but as they might be".

watermark 4 contains yet more authors and a quote from Richard Feynman: "What I cannot build, I cannot understand

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mycoplasma_laboratorium

Ok, so you have proved that a human-modified species contains watermarks they were genetically modified by humans to contain.

If humans are capable of this, why don't we see "made by God" tags in the genome of extant animals?

You claimed to have an example of irreducible complexity in the natural world, and yet the only one you've come up with is a laboratory experiment to produce seen nowhere else in nature?

How does that prove any naturally occurring species is "irreducibly complex"?

http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/123..._revealed/
Reply



Messages In This Thread
Theoretical physics shows "irreducible complexity" arguments invalid. - by Rampant.A.I. - May 4, 2014 at 8:33 pm

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  [Serious] What is the current best scientific evidence we have that shows that consciousness... born_to_be_a_loser 28 5095 January 14, 2025 at 8:11 pm
Last Post: Tonus
  The Foucault pendulum in the Kirchhoff Institute for Physics. Jehanne 1 843 January 30, 2022 at 12:06 am
Last Post: Fireball
  Real Life Physics Puzzles onlinebiker 23 3663 July 15, 2019 at 9:49 am
Last Post: BrianSoddingBoru4
  Physics and life Brian37 3 1224 December 4, 2017 at 2:31 pm
Last Post: Astreja
  Questions about Physics, Biology and perspective bennyboy 14 3614 June 23, 2016 at 5:34 am
Last Post: Alex K
  Scientific arguments for eating Organic/non-GMO food? CapnAwesome 15 5091 June 10, 2015 at 6:49 pm
Last Post: Pyrrho
  physics / maths twocompulsive 6 2882 March 13, 2012 at 3:19 pm
Last Post: downbeatplumb



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)